Obama's Dukakis Moment: Bowling Blunders Matter

Posted April 9, 2008 | 07:14 AM (EST)



Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

Last week many had their fun poking fun at Barack Obama's gutter balls. Monday on Ellen Hillary Clinton decided to toss a little ball at some pins on set in order to keep Obama's bowling blunder in the conversation. It wasn't the most tactful response. But Obama's poor showing was again talked about.

Forest for the trees, bad bowling really should not matter in the making of the president. Right? We are likely in a recession. We are at war. A lot of folks don't have health insurance. Great presidents need not be able to bowl. But then, it does matter if he is to win that Oval Office.

What Obama's bowling highlighted was a larger mistake he cannot make when reaching out to the white working and middle class. He cannot be the man he is not.

This has less to do with his race than his Ivy League professorial demeanor. Democrats have long nominated candidates who exude the worst stereotypes of the conceived liberal elitist.

It's not bowling that's the point. Many modern presidential candidates have bowled on the trail. But there is something particularly embarrassing about a 37 in seven frames for a candidate who is attempting to prove he is one of the guys.

What could prove fatal is if Obama keeps making this mistake. A far more consequential version occurred in the 1988 race. Michael Dukakis donned military coveralls on top of his suit, got inside that M-1 tank, gripped the machine gun, and murmured "rat-a-tat." He looked like a boy playing war and was pummeled for his Patton moment.

"The tank has to go down in history as one of the classic political blunders in the world," Ronald Reagan's pollster, Richard Wirthlin, once told me. "It goes back to my point. You can't stretch the candidate. You've got to portray who he naturally is."

All politics is Shakespeare. When John Kerry spent the whole of his 2004 convention calling attention to his service in Vietnam, it highlighted Democrats' own national security insecurity. "The lady doth protests too much," as it was put in Hamlet.

Obama's bowling was not Dukakis' tank moment. But it did become the butt of late night comedians. Jimmy Kimmel quipped, "I bowled a 37 when I was a baby and I was drunk, by the way."

Obama can ill afford to offer Kimmel such good material if he is to make inroads with middle and working class white men. Issues matter, but not as much as our conception of the person advocating those issues.

This was not Obama's first time stepping into a role he could not pull off. Last October, Obama went on Ellen himself. He danced in a way that was well, consistent with a stiff professor. But of course that's an issue of undermining his "cool," a positive perception not so easily refuted by John McCain. Bowling is an issue of undermining his inner regular Joe, one easily refuted by McCain.

Obama should have known that if he cannot bowl, he should not bowl. A president does not throw out the first pitch, if he cannot throw a pitch. It has always been a male presidential candidate's burden to not sissify him self on the campaign trail, an inconvenience that falls particularly on Democratic candidates because of past mistakes. That does not mean bowling is that masculine. It's not in fact. But it is emasculating to attempt to be the kind of guy that bowls and look like the kind of guy who does not.

It would be absurd to discuss bowling in the context of the presidency if it did not evoke a larger lesson. Reagan, as well as Franklin Delano Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy, understood that symbols, narratives, and sets win presidencies. Should Obama not, it will lead to a Dukakis-like moment that could serve as his tattooed slip up.

Consider JFK. Even as he was suffering from Addison's disease he was shown swimming or tossing a football with his family. FDR more famously hid his disability. But he also pioneered the use of themes in radio to captivate voters. In this YouTube age a candidate's image cannot be tailored as even Reagan's was. But then images now matter all the more because the mistakes are replayed ad nauseam.

Obama's bus tour through Pennsylvania was an attempt to ground his lofty image. In America, a presidential candidate cannot just care about the people he must show he is one of the people. So Obama ate chilidogs. Fed a calf. Toured a factory. The trip was meant to show him as one of us. But he ended up looking like one of them -- them being that liberal caricature.

It is axiomatic in presidential politics that a candidate must refute the worst stereotypes of his party. At least Kerry was a good shot when he put on L.L. Bean and blew two pheasants out of the sky. The problem was Kerry also went parasailing and snowboarding, against his senior staff's advice. The elite vacations reaffirmed the negative perception of liberals as elite. That, like the tank moment, made it into Republican ads.

Obama decries the superficial in our politics. And perhaps he can win denouncing gutter politics and throwing gutter balls. But that's not the making of past presidents. Sometimes, even as we "turn the page" it's important to consider the lessons of all those earlier chapters (even the silly ones).

***

David Paul Kuhn, a Politico.com senior political writer, is author of the The Neglected Voter: White Men and the Democratic Dilemma.


Comments
278
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

Hint sample
View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next › Last » (7 pages total)

So instead of taking the bus tour, Obama should be traveling in Pennsylvania on a Harley?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:27 PM on 04/11/2008

I think that MR.kuhn makes a very good point, republicans in the past have been very successful in painting the democratic nominee as a latte drinking liberal elitest who are out of touch with regular americans, they did it with kerry,gore,dukakis,mondale and mcgovern.The only two candidates they could not do it to where the only two democratic candidates that have went on to become presidents in the past 40 years, clinton and carter,i think it has to do with the fact that they are both from the south and it was hard for the gop to paint them as ivy league liberals.That is why i always thought that john edwards would make a much better general election candidate.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:29 PM on 04/10/2008

Did you really not get the point of the article? The intent, I believe, is to point out what can happen when someone in politics presents himself as something other than what he is. It is not charming or self effacing to say you need no help in foreign policy, when you have zero experience. It is arrogance. I do not find it charming when a Democratic politician is so ambitious, he will court the NRA for more votes. It is rude to say to a former first lady, "You aren't that unlikeable, Hillary" in a nationally televised debate. It is not common for a candidate for the nomination of the Democratic Party, to praise former presidents of the Republican Party and not mention one of the most popular Democratic presidents in the Party;s history. Pres. GHW Bush, a man Obama admires because of his intelligence war, left office with an approval rating in the 30's. Pres. Reagan was vilified by Democrats for his economic policies and neglect of social programs. But, Bill Clinton with an approval rating in the 60's and with a legacy of commitment to improving the lives of minorities, is ignored by this self effacing man.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:13 PM on 04/10/2008

Playing at bowling is a superficial way to appear as "one of the guys". Why does anyone doubt that? Obama's main task, really his only task since he isn't much of a Senator except as a yes man on other Senators' bills, is getting people to vote for him. He really doesn't find taking positions on issues terribly important unless that could impact the vote for him. Witness the business of boycotting the opening ceremony of the Olympics. If he can garner votes that way, okay. But at least he could have tried to do a bit better at the game.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:46 PM on 04/10/2008

While images such as bowling prowess should not count, they do. This is not however an inditement of the poor bowling Mr. Obama, but of the American People esp. the media pundits. We constatnly ask for a leader, then we demand he be one of us. A leader should be out in front leading with persuasion and example, but as a people we hate anyone who stands out. Al Gore is a prime example. He was out in front on the internet development, then the liars took over. He warned us of global warning, and he was scorned. He rolled his eyes at Geage Bush and was ridiculed. Who isn't rolling their eyes now. Mr. Gore showed himself to be a leader again when he accepted "defeat".

HL Menken said that as democracy is perfected some day the common folk of the land would acheive their hearts desire and a complete moron would occupy the White House.

Perhaps the ridicule heaped upon Americans from abroad is deserved. We chose Bush, we might not choose Obama. American voters deserve the "leaders" they elect. Does anyone in the media have the guts to tell John Q Public to grow up?

I live in a super-Red state, so I am understandably cynical about the American voter.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:59 PM on 04/10/2008

You missed the whole point of the bowling exercise - it wasn't an ill-fated attempt to appear "one of the guys" by playing an idiot game. Seriously, do you know anyone over the age of seven who still bowls? Obama wasn't trying to fit in by being a good bowler, he was trying to fit in by mocking bowling.
"Look everyone! I'm like you! I suck at bowling and laugh out loud at people who seriously care!"
Well played, Barack!!!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:50 PM on 04/10/2008

I am not after the bowling score. What gets me is that Obama throws the bowling ball like a girl. Yes, imagine that, LIKE A GIRL! Is he as effete as Kerry?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:01 PM on 04/10/2008

People are missing the point. Of course it is stupid to think it matters if someone is a lousy bowler. But it was stupid to dislike Dukakis for being short or Kerry for liking to windsurf. But people who vote did feel that way. Lots of them. Screaming it is stupid does not change the facts of life, that image matters.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 AM on 04/10/2008

Forget bowling...I prefer to have a president who can play billiards and knows a bit of english.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:38 AM on 04/10/2008

I'm certainly not your guy, then Willie. I use proper english, and more important, I use it to good effect. I also have an ethic or two ready to use, and a decent grasp of human dynamics and what people need. But I guess that's all pretty much useless, because I sukk at pool, until I get a beer or two in me!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:17 AM on 04/11/2008

Dear Mr. Kuhn:

No wonder our elected leaders cannot solve urgent problems. If the ability to bawl is now a requirement as to who should be elected president, we are doomed as a country. Here were are in one of the worst economic recessions with millions of people loosing their houses and thousands losing their jobs, with a war in Iraq that is costing billions of dollars, with gasoline prices shooting up the roof, and all you have to worry about is whether a presidential candidate can bawl! Pretty soon the bawling alley may close not because Mr. Obama can bawl but because the customers cannot afford to to pay for bawling. I hope the majority of us are not so stupid to pick the president on the basis of their ability to bawl, or their ability play basketball, baseball, football, tennis, golf, etc.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:22 AM on 04/10/2008

This blog has got to be one of most petty, least relevant articles ever posted on Huffington.

Good thing Kuhn is not one of Obama's campaign advisers. However, I guess the only harm is space wasted that could have been used instead to contrast, for example, Barack's timetable for exiting Iraq with that of "Century" McCain.

At least Kuhn's preoccupation with Obama's gutter balls moved me enough to look up my password in order to post my frustration at such a silly blurb, considering everything else that truly deserves vetting and discussion after eight-too-many years of gutter balls from the current the White House.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:21 AM on 04/10/2008

Okay, here's the plan: let's get video of Barack playing basketball with his Secret Service detail.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:36 AM on 04/10/2008

You missed his comeback moment! He said when he won the whitehouse he would replace the bowling alley with a basketball court. He should challenge McCain to a one on one game to see who's got game. Then again, Mccain may want a flying dogfight. Maybe Hillary could talk you to death. I guess Hillary wins at being a natural woman.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:30 AM on 04/10/2008

McCain would want a cuss off. He knows he has few peers there, especially since Dick Cheney would not be participating.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:14 AM on 04/10/2008

Give me a freaking break. Are we so stupid as a country that we would count as important the bowling score of our President? If so...then we deserve everything we will get. Yet another moron as the leader of the free world. A moron who has old-age dementia.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:16 PM on 04/09/2008

Bowling? You've got to be kidding me? First Obama is too cocky--too self-assured. He shows some humanity, that he's not perfect, and now this is bad. How can he possibly win when he's being held to these crazy standards. Kuhn, could you write about something of substance--say Obama's policy of Iraq?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:45 PM on 04/09/2008

While 37 is certainly a terrible score, I don't think this is as bad as the author thinks, because Obama can point out that his forte is basketball. He was known as "Barry O'Bomber" at the Punahou School in Hawai'i. It's no shame that a great discus thrower may not be a great quarterback, nor a great swimmer a great runner.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:25 PM on 04/09/2008

I'm guessing we haven't seem "Barry O'Bomber" in action because basketball might be seen as "too black". Or maybe he doesn't like to be seen sweating.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:53 PM on 04/10/2008

I'm not sure where you're going with this one, Mr. Kuhn. If we honestly want to bank on authenticity (and I agree that it will matter going against McCain), then Obama is far and away our best shot. He hasn't had a $400 haircut moment, or a $109 million tax return; he's far closer to the average Joe/Jane than any of the other Democrats in the field. And yeah, watch him play hoops. He more than compensates for his bowling deficiencies on the basketball court.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:13 PM on 04/09/2008

On the Ellen Show, wasn't Hillary the one that tried out bowling? And missed miserably, twice?! How is that supposed to keep the conversation going over Obama?

When I saw the Ellen Show clip, my first reaction was: Why on earth did Hillary challenge Obama to a bowling contest, if she herself can't bowl to save her campaign?

In the end, I find the omission in your article telling--it is as if you, the writer, wants to bring the focus back on Obama. Like Bill Clinton's lawyer's most recent reference to Wright.

I think Hillary's Bosnia lie is the Dukakis moment of this election year. Like the Dukakis's tank helmet, Hillary's lies make her look small.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:49 PM on 04/09/2008

Right Lizzy, his bowling doesn't matter. The important thing here is the reference the author made re. white male voters and your reference to a black man not comfortable with any sport other than basketball. Was it just last week Gov. Rendel was buried in criticism because he made a political observation about one part of Pa. voting a certain way. I think he deserves an apology from you and the author of this "piece." My big problem with Obama's bus tour, his praise for the first George Bush and his Gulf War. And I have a little problem with his admiration of Ronald Reagan mentioned in the same speech. Then there was the debate when he admired Reagan and was scolded by John Edwards and Hillary Clinton. I don't know how long you have been a Democrat, but most of us have fonder memories of the Clinton presidency.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:59 AM on 04/10/2008

[Next-to-last portion of my four-segment response to your 'piece'... ]

If nothing else, when some people are glomming onto the opportunities to stereotype, why don't you just go all out and proclaim that just because Barack is black obviously doesn't mean he's great at all sports or even a good dancer?? It would make at least as much sense as this poor attempt to be analytical.

As someone else has already noted, this was a self-effacing gesture on Barack's part to be participatory... end of statement. One doesn't do "bravado" by warning people this is something they haven't tried in years. No. That would be intro'd by something to the effect of, "Oh, I LOVE to bowl. I used to do it all the time! Give me that ball!" Guess what? We won't be having any bowl-offs with Iraq or Iran or any other country in the world... this goes beyond non-essential, straight into the reductio ad absurdum column. Next time, do your best to write something relevant.


~ Elizabeth Bacon-Smith

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:31 PM on 04/09/2008

[I'll try my last portion, again, since it seems not to have made it to here ~ unfortunately, it won't have everything it did have, but that's okay.]

As someone has also already noted, your piece is insulting to the intelligence of voters. I would appreciate it if you would not contribute to this type of rote response to various elements of this crucial election, with this kind of knee-jerk-type reaction, where thoughtful consideration and serious thinking are non-existent. Unfortunately, some people buy into what you've offered here, and it's that kind of trend we are attempting to reverse in our country. If abstinence is the only way you can manage to not contribute to it, then I guess that'll have to do.

I would also sure appreciate it if YOUR boss would remind you that you're supposed to be covering the most historic Presidential Race in our country's history... and NOT "Bowling for Dollars." I would immensely appreciate some perspective that actually relates to my life and to the lives of other U.S. citizens and others living in our country, as well as the lives of soldiers and innocent civilians, who are losing theirs every day in Iraq... and other people with whom we interact around the world.

Thank you and I'm done commenting on this.


~ Elizabeth Bacon-Smith

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:22 PM on 04/09/2008

Rezko, Wright, and now the bowling for president incident. Has this man no shame? Yes, if he can't shake the international bowling debacle, he shouldn't be president.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:22 PM on 04/09/2008

Dude it the most you have to think about in life is Obama's bowling score you need to get a life. Who cares? I don't. This is the problem with the media...this moron just spent way to much time trying to tell us just how important Obama's bowling score matters. What matters more than this is global warming, Columbia free trade agreements, Darfur, the war in Iraq, Buchanan calling for military action on Iran...we got way more important things to worry about than this guys.

Volunteer for Change!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:02 PM on 04/09/2008

My impression was that the whole stunt was a purely self-deprecating joke on himself, and that he was just having a good time at it at no one's expense. Sort of like the person who "can't boil water" and knows it joining Julia Childs on a cooking show. I certainly bore no resemblance to Dukakis looking so out of place in that tank. That WAS a stupid stunt that just made him look silly!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:51 PM on 04/09/2008

The narrative of this story couldn't be more wrong. Listen to Obama today in Pennsylvania, and you'll notice that he has inserted his bowling experience into his speeches. His gutter balls have allowed him an opportunity to laugh along with the crowd at himself, a trait that is admirable and endearing. Obama has used his bowling experience as a means to connect with the people of Pennsylvania, and it has worked. Once again, Obama has taken what the talking-heads deemed as a negative, and turned it into a positive.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:42 PM on 04/09/2008

"...Obama should have known that if he cannot bowl, he should not bowl..."

That's it in a nutshell. I was STUNNED when I saw how badly he bowled. Stunned because it seemed like such an obvious thing: Obama should have known that if he can't bowl, he should not bowl. I can only presume that when Obama was asked by his campaign PR team "can you bowl?" his masculine pride got the better of him. Maybe he just thought 'not since I was ten, but how hard could it be?"

US Politics has debased itself to the point that it seems to come down to "Who would I rather have a beer with?". It's been that way for a few elections now. The stuffed shirt loses and the fun guy wins. And if years later it becomes apparent that wasn't the best way to select a President, voters somehow forget that in time for the next election.

I feel stupid saying it, but it really could come down (in part) to "Can you vote for a guy who can't even bowl?". I know the Republicans will make as much hay out of it as they can. Having worked in advertising I know how easy it to change peoples perception about something through repititive inagery (ads!). Look how well the Repubs did last time in turning Kerry from a Decorated Vet into Gumby.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:29 PM on 04/09/2008

You're joking right? Or else you must support another candidate. Who the hell cares how he bowls? I won the prize as worst bowler for my office and we all laughed. That does not make me an idiot or any less a person.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:42 PM on 04/10/2008

No, I'm serious AND I'm an Obama supporter. Which is why I was so surprised he wasn't savvy enough to realise how this would look.

But my fingers are crossed that I'm wrong and this doesn't become a big deal. As Kuhn has noted, Kerry was sunk by images of him parasailing and snowboarding and I hope this doesn't become Obama's 'albatross' clip (as is HRC's 'Bosnia' visit already) for the republicans.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:11 AM on 04/11/2008

[I believe this is the proper placement for continuing my posting... if not, well, then, oh well... just call it a gutter ball.]

Continuing my earlier posting...

You're so right that being able to BOWL is not a prerequisite for effectiveness as the President of the United States. When I first tried bowling [7th or 8th grade], my first score was 104! Where should that young girl have applied for nomination as the first female candidate for President of the United States? She obviously would have beat Hillary Clinton, who sure wouldn't have managed to bowl 104, given the rate she was going on Ellen's show. Of course, after my stellar, beginning score, I plummeted... with my highest ever being 120. So, what does this tell you? Nothing. Exactly my point.

[Still have to continue... ]


~ Elizabeth Bacon-Smith

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:29 PM on 04/09/2008

David Paul Kuhn, Senior Political Writer... you have stretched the limits to come up with a piece that you want people to see as relevant. This was a miserable failure in that context.

A person who is willing to try at a non-"masculine" sport... is a good sport. Being a good sport, and a risk taker with one's 'cool' image, carries a lot more weight with most [rational] people than whether a heavy ball that lends itself to being awkwardly thrown... particularly by someone who hasn't even tried in decades... goes three or four feet to the right of where it was 'aimed.'

Unlike Kerry, he was not trying the bravado image as you have depicted. He was being a good sport and trying his hand at a physical GAME. Had he refused, you likely would have wound up a way to say that he's unwilling to be a regular person and at least try, lest his 'cool' image be blown.


[Continued in my next post, as I don't want to omit a single word... ]


~ Elizabeth Bacon-Smith

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:06 PM on 04/09/2008

Well then this very concerned columnist will no doubt be happier that Obama is having a basketball event with some of his donors in IN and no doubt, will be shown to his physical advantage there.

But oh noes! what if male white voters don't respond well to a guy playing basketball? Will they think it's "too black"? Oh dear. Whatever will Obama do!

Granted the majority of the American people were mind-numbingly stupid enough to either a.) vote for Dubya or b.) stay home and thus in effect, vote for Dubya, still, I hope that they're not so mind-numbingly stupid as to base their votes on Obama's bowling scores.

I grant the point that images matter, trivia CAN matter much more than it should in a campaign (see above mentioned stupidity of American people), but I have to hope that Americans really aren't SO stupid as to base their voting for the President of the US based on someones bad bowling score. I could be wrong about that though. Like the man said, no one ever went broke betting on the stupidity of the American people. And when we are, we get the government we deserve.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:22 PM on 04/09/2008
collapse furelise See